Linux group complains to EU, says Microsoft actions are "absolutely anti-competitive"

[nsane.forums]

A Linux community association has complained to the EU against Microsoft, claiming UEFI Secure Boot is an anti-competitive "obstruction mechanism" to booting other operating systems on Windows 8 PCs.

Earlier this month, Microsoft found itself in hot water with the European Union, following a violation of its antitrust agreement there relating to its web browser ballot screen, dating back to 2009. The incident – which Microsoft acknowledged and apologised for – resulted in a fine amounting to $732m, the latest in a long line of penalties that the EU has imposed on the company; indeed, Microsoft has handed over $3.04bn in fines to the EU since 2004.

EU officials may well be rubbing their hands with glee once more, having received a new complaint against Microsoft alleging anti-competitive behaviour, this time from a Spanish association representing the Linux community.

As Reuters reports, Hispalinux – which has around 8,000 members – has filed a complaint with the European Commission against Microsoft, alleging that the company has imposed restrictions that make it unnecessarily difficult for users to boot Windows 8 computers to another operating system.

The complaint relates to the UEFI Secure Boot start-up feature, which Hispalinux refers to as an “obstruction mechanism” that impedes the ability of users to easily boot a PC sold with Windows 8 to an alternative OS such as Linux. According to Hispalinux, it establishes a “de facto technological jail for computer booting systems… making Microsoft’s Windows platform less neutral than ever”.

Microsoft saw this one coming a long time ago. In September 2011, when Windows 8 was still in pre-launch development, former Windows chief Steven Sinofsky and Tony Mangefeste from the company’s Ecosystem team, sought to explain how Secure Boot was not intended to ‘lock out’ other operating systems, but was introduced as “part of [the] Windows 8 secured boot architecture”.

Graphic via 'Building Windows 8' blog, September 22, 2011

Mangefeste said at the time that “complete control over the PC continues to be available” to users, adding that “secure boot is a UEFI protocol, not a Windows 8 feature” and that “Microsoft does not mandate or control the settings on PC firmware that control or enable secured boot from any operating system other than Windows”. He also said that “OEMs have the ability to customize their firmware to meet the needs of their customers by customizing the level of certificate and policy management on their platform”.

Hispalinux evidently disagrees. The head of the organisation, Jose Maria Lancho, told Reuters that Microsoft’s implementation of UEFI Secure Boot “is absolutely anti-competitive. It’s really bad for the user and for the European software industry.”

View: Original Article

[DKT27]

Microsoft accused of locking out Linux in EU antitrust complaint

UEFI Secure Boot restrictions cited in complaint to European officials.

A Spanish group that represents open source software users has accused Microsoft of using an "obstruction mechanism" to prevent buyers of Windows 8 computers from installing Linux-based operating systems.

That mechanism, of course, is UEFI Secure Boot, which improves boot-time security on machines designed to run Windows 8 by only booting operating systems signed with a trusted certificate. This requirement led to much consternation among Linux users in the months prior to the Windows 8 launch, but in practice probably hasn't prevented that many people from using Linux. UEFI Secure Boot can be disabled in a computer's firmware settings. Additionally, the Linux Foundation and others have provided workarounds that let Linux-based operating systems boot without disabling the security mechanism.

The 8,000-member Spanish open source group, Hispalinux, said in a complaint filed today with the European Commission that UEFI Secure Boot is "a de facto technological jail for computer booting systems... making Microsoft's Windows platform less neutral than ever," Reuters reported today. Users must obtain digital keys from Microsoft to install non-Windows operating systems, the group noted.

The EU this month fined Microsoft €561 million (or $732 million) for failing to comply with a previous antitrust agreement that required the company to provide Windows users with a choice of Web browsers. There's no indication yet of whether the EU will act on the UEFI complaint, however. Microsoft and European officials have not yet commented.

The fact that the EU hasn't already targeted Microsoft over UEFI Secure Boot may be good news for the maker of Windows. EU antitrust officials previously looked at how Windows RT, the ARM-based version of Windows 8, prevents the operation of rival browsers and decided that no disciplinary action was warranted.

View: Original Article

[Arachnoid]

Shirely this suit should be against the hardware manufacturers who made the devices?

[DKT27]

Shirely this suit should be against the hardware manufacturers who made the devices?

Does Microsoft require UEFI in all the hardware? I think so. Who has the authority of signing the secure boot certificates? Until now, probably only Microsoft did.

[DKT27]

This one gives a little more info:

Linux group hits Microsoft with complaint over 'Secure Boot'

It's long been clear that Linux users are more than a little unhappy with the “Secure Boot” technology implemented by default in Windows 8 hardware, but in Spain, one group has decided to do more than simply try to work around it.

Specifically, on Tuesday Linux group Hispalinux filed a 14-page complaint with the Madrid office of the European Commission, calling Secure Boot an “obstruction mechanism,” according to Reuters.

Earlier this month, European Union antitrust officials fined Microsoft $731 million for failing to live up to a 2009 settlement that requires it to offer Windows users a choice of alternate browsers.

Controversial solutions

Originally discovered by Red Hat developer Matthew Garrett in late 2011, the Secure Boot problem for Linux users arises from the fact that Windows 8 hardware comes with Secure Boot enabled in the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI), meaning that only operating systems with an appropriate digital signature will be able to boot.

Microsoft maintains that the technology was implemented in the name of improved security.

Since then, however, the topic has been the focus of much urgent work among the various Linux distributions as well the Linux Foundation, all in an effort to create workarounds allowing Linux to boot on Windows 8 hardware. The Free Software Foundation and Linux creator Linus Torvalds himself have also weighed in with their own opinions on the matter.

Fedora's solution to the problem has been to get its first stage boot loader, or “shim,” signed with a Microsoft key, causing considerable controversy among Linux users.

'Irreparable damage'

Now, with this new complaint from Hispalinux, which reportedly represents some 8,000 users and developers of the free and open source operating system in Spain, Microsoft faces yet another probe for what the group says are anticompetitive practices that place a “technical barrier” before consumers and cause “irreparable damage” to the European software industry.

I reached out for confirmation and further insight to Antoine Colombani, a spokesman for competition and for Vice President Joaquín Almunia within the European Commission, but he declined to comment. I'm still waiting to hear back from Microsoft, but will post an update if and when that happens.

View: Original Article

[ffi]

What gives those commies from the EUSSR the right to decide how OEM's and MS make hardware? If consumers really wanted computers that are able to boot other OS's surely some OEM's would offer some but even if none of the OEM's decided to make UEFI-disabled hardware it is immoral for the EUSSR to demand OEM's to create such hardware, only in communist and/or fascist states can governments make such demands. How people do business amongst themselves is the business of those people not the government. No one can demand to have a specific product delivered to them just because they want it.

Of course since we life in the EUSSR, which has absolutely no idea what a free market is, and even if it did, just doesn't respect it I have no doubt the linux foundation will win, which of course will be another big blow for personal freedom

[dcs18]

I'm using an UEFI partition and have been thoroughly enjoying it over the last quarter - it also brings with it the unparalleled pleasures of GPT.

If Linux has an issue with UEFI why don't they garner the support of OEM Manufacturers to develop hardware exclusively for Linux? They can then suit themselves about the presence/absence of UEFI - I'd be the first one to dunk Microsoft and jump onto the Linux bandwagon. But, where the fcuk is the Linux bandwagon - why are they so dependent on Microsoft. If they are indeed so helplessly dependent - then, why complain??? I the Consumer have got the right to complain - I demand the unadulterated pleasures of UEFI & GPT. Why is only Microsoft able to provide those pleasures whereas Linux is not???

Now, the millon-dollar question . . . . . . . .

• Microsoft is an a$$hole >>----> granted
• Linux is El Supremo >>----> granted
• Microsoft is exorbitantly priced >>----> granted
• Linux is free >>----> granted

Granted from my end that Linux is the be-all-end-all on Planet Earth. So, here's my question >>----> given the above conditions - why the fcuk are OEM Manufacturers refusing to provide the general public with all their hardware exclusively pre-installed with Linux???

[anuseems]

Microsoft under fire in Europe over Windows 8 UEFI Secure Boot

Fresh from a 561 million fine for failing to comply with a previous antitrust agreement, Microsoft is once again being targeted in Europe over their allegedly anti-competitive business practices. This time the complaint focuses on Microsofts implementation of UEFI Secure Boot for Windows 8, which according to Spanish open source software group Hispalinux, is an obstruction mechanism to prevent alternative OS installations. The feature in question is an industry initiative designed as an alternative to the aging BIOS that improves security against boot loader attacks by only running software signed with a trusted certificate. With the release of Windows 8 last year, Microsoft started requiring UEFI on machines carrying the Certified for Windows 8 logo. While OEMs have the option of providing a way to turn off UEFI so other operating systems can run on the machine, many in the Linux community feared that companies would not provide a UEFI off-switch. That may vary from one manufacturer to another, but in practice this hasn't stopped many people from booting Linux. The Linux Foundation and others have provided workarounds that let Linux-based operating systems boot without disabling the security mechanism, including one that involves Microsoft-signed binary keys that are dynamically added to the Linux kernel. But some members of the Linux community have been vocal against solutions like this, with Linus Torvalds calling it moronic arguing Microsoft could arbitrarily disable the key. Whether Hispalinuxs 14-page complaint with the European Commission holds any merit remains to be seen, but it appears to cover much the same ground. "The fact is that no software or operating system that needs the boot system to install or work, will be able to access the computer without Microsoft's prior permission," the group argued in a blog post, adding that this is "completely unjustified. Hispalinux is asking the European Commission to grant a preliminary injunction requiring Microsoft to modify its requirement for manufacturers to implement Microsoft's UEFI Secure Boot. @

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/032613-spanish-linux-user-group-files-268102.html

[DKT27]

Threads merged.